Selected topics which may be contentious - cougarguard.com — unofficial BYU Cougars / LDS sports, football, basketball forum and message board

fusnik11 · 01-31-2006, 08:06 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvatar

Maybe I'm feeling rebuked by the lord. Maybe it's just good old fashioned guilt for messing with people's beliefs. I don't know. Maybe I'll start a new thread addressing Fusnik's questions. What Robin said got me thinking. I don't want to be even partly responsible for people losing their testimonies. Especially when marriages and families might be effected.

I'll think about it...

please spare me....

what scientific evidence are you going to present thats new, shocking, or previously never read by a large group of the posters here? do you honestly think you are going to present something that hasnt been presented, researched, hashed, and rehashed?

you dont think i know about 'the book of breathings', polyandry, etc?

spare me dude, seriously spare me.

Alkili · 01-31-2006, 09:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvatar

Maybe I'm feeling rebuked by the lord. Maybe it's just good old fashioned guilt for messing with people's beliefs. I don't know. Maybe I'll start a new thread addressing Fusnik's questions. What Robin said got me thinking. I don't want to be even partly responsible for people losing their testimonies. Especially when marriages and families might be effected.

I'll think about it...

What I don't get is that you say that your into all things scientific. The Book of Abraham isn't cut and dry from either prespective, they make a lot of claims that aren't backed up just like we do. So my question for you is why do you side with one side rather then the other since neither side has anything near the whole story at this point?

Iluvatar · 01-31-2006, 09:40 PM

Fusnik

I never claimed that anything I had to say was "new, shocking, or previously never read by a large group of posters". I was simply trying to say that discussing these things (Book of Abraham, Polyandry, Kinderhook plates, different versions of the first vision story, Nephi vs. Moroni, Book of Mormon and DNA, unfulfilled prophecies, View of Hebrews, Emanuel Swedenborg, Mormonism and Masonry, etc., etc. etc.) might plant seeds that ultimately lead to problems with some people's testimonies.

Considering the reaction that I've gotten on both the issues that I've posted on previously, I would say I'm warranted in thinking that a fair # of people, even on this board, were largely unfamiliar with the topics.

I didn't mean to intonate that you were ignorant, or couldn't handle what I had say. I would say precisely the opposite is true. I believe you to be one of the better informed members of this forum. I just don't know how badly I want to rehash these things. It seems to bring out the worst in me, and others. I'm not a bitter, argumentative person by nature, and I don't like feeling that way.

I just want to weigh the benefit of discussing these things against the possible consequences.

Alkili,

There isn't a secular scholar in the world that would come to the conclusion that JS actually translated the Book of Abraham from ancient Papyri given the body of evidence that we now posess. I'm not going to say any more than this. When people refuse to look at sources besides FARMS, and fairboard, there's no point in further discussion (not saying that this is what you do...I don't know what you've read).

myboynoah · 01-31-2006, 09:41 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvatar

I'm starting to feel a little guilty about posting certain things here. I don't think I should have posted the bits about Polyandry, or the Book of Abraham. I guess I feel a little remorse for dragging some of you guys into my crisis of faith.

Why the guilt?

I can't speak for the others here, but these things are far from new to me.

Polyandry? A little freaky, yes, but I can think of some plausible explanations. Odd that the husbands attended the ceremonies in many cases. Odd that these people remained faithful for the most part. So much of this doesn't make sense, and the historical record is very incomplete when it comes to explaining what people were thinking or the reasons for the decisions they made. A lot of speculation, however, most, if not all of it placing the prophet in a negative light. So many mind readers out there. Short of sitting down and talking to the participants about this, it would be very hard for me to come to a conclusion either way. I am left to putting this in a holding pattern.

Book of Abraham? I think Archaea about sums up my thinking.

But aside from all this, I keep having spiritual experiences. I read the Book of Mormon and am moved and fascinated by it complexity, internal consistency, and multilayered messages. I pray and receive inspiration. I see the gospel work in people's lives. I have a lifetime of this. How can one throw that aside just because we assume Hoffman pulled the wool over the brethern's eyes?

Back to the Book of Mormon, I've yet to read or hear a plausible, evidence-based explanation that trumps the story told by Joseph Smith, Emma, the three witnesses, and others involved.

Just some thoughts.

All-American · 01-31-2006, 11:30 PM

It doesn't bother me at all that we can't explain how the Book of Abraham came about. It passes what is, for me, the most effective test of veracity: expoundability. You can take what is written in the Book of Abraham, study it without end, and never fail to learn something new.

Science seems to point out otherwise? That's fine with me.

Iluvatar, I would welcome your insights on those topics, but if you'd like to avoid bringing them up, I can respect that too.

DirtyHippieUTE · 01-31-2006, 11:46 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvatar

Maybe I'm feeling rebuked by the lord. Maybe it's just good old fashioned guilt for messing with people's beliefs. I don't know. Maybe I'll start a new thread addressing Fusnik's questions. What Robin said got me thinking. I don't want to be even partly responsible for people losing their testimonies. Especially when marriages and families might be effected.

I'll think about it...

Yup... You're going to :twisted: HELL :evil:

Seriously, I don't think there is anything wrong with asking questions in a forum where questions are solicited. Even if you are playing "devil's advocate," I don't think you should feel guilty.

The only time I have ever felt that someone stepped over the line and should have felt guilty is when they intentionally misrepresented certain opinions as "facts" and "truth" in order to destroy the beliefs of another.

If you tell me your opinion that you believe piss tastes like apple juice then it's on me if I go out and give it a try. If you hand me a glass of piss and tell me it IS warm apple juice then you should feel some guilt.

ute4ever · 02-01-2006, 12:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Iluvatar

I was simply trying to say that discussing these things might plant seeds that ultimately lead to problems with some people's testimonies.

Is that a problem? I found it to be the best way to shut my greenies up when they were being annoying. To this day Elder Cornea still hasn't determined why it took the Jaredites 12 months to find America when it took Columbus only 4.

SteelBlue · 02-01-2006, 12:10 AM

Iluvatar,

I think that the initial responses you got were during a time when there were several people posting who were posting for the first time and now don't frequent this site much. I'd say that the regulars here were all well aware of the issues that you've brought up and were not "shaken" in the faith. I don't think you should feel guilty for stating what you are feeling as long as it's truly what you're feeling. I think that maybe some felt that you were trolling, but I don't believe that was the case.

01-31-2006, 09:40 PM	#3
Iluvatar Junior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 52	Spare you what? Fusnik I never claimed that anything I had to say was "new, shocking, or previously never read by a large group of posters". I was simply trying to say that discussing these things (Book of Abraham, Polyandry, Kinderhook plates, different versions of the first vision story, Nephi vs. Moroni, Book of Mormon and DNA, unfulfilled prophecies, View of Hebrews, Emanuel Swedenborg, Mormonism and Masonry, etc., etc. etc.) might plant seeds that ultimately lead to problems with some people's testimonies. Considering the reaction that I've gotten on both the issues that I've posted on previously, I would say I'm warranted in thinking that a fair # of people, even on this board, were largely unfamiliar with the topics. I didn't mean to intonate that you were ignorant, or couldn't handle what I had say. I would say precisely the opposite is true. I believe you to be one of the better informed members of this forum. I just don't know how badly I want to rehash these things. It seems to bring out the worst in me, and others. I'm not a bitter, argumentative person by nature, and I don't like feeling that way. I just want to weigh the benefit of discussing these things against the possible consequences. Alkili, There isn't a secular scholar in the world that would come to the conclusion that JS actually translated the Book of Abraham from ancient Papyri given the body of evidence that we now posess. I'm not going to say any more than this. When people refuse to look at sources besides FARMS, and fairboard, there's no point in further discussion (not saying that this is what you do...I don't know what you've read). __________________ \"What we do in life echoes in eternity\"

01-31-2006, 11:30 PM	#5
All-American Senior Member Join Date: Jan 2006 Posts: 3,420	It doesn't bother me at all that we can't explain how the Book of Abraham came about. It passes what is, for me, the most effective test of veracity: expoundability. You can take what is written in the Book of Abraham, study it without end, and never fail to learn something new. Science seems to point out otherwise? That's fine with me. Iluvatar, I would welcome your insights on those topics, but if you'd like to avoid bringing them up, I can respect that too.

02-01-2006, 12:10 AM	#8
SteelBlue Senior Member Join Date: Aug 2005 Location: Norcal Posts: 5,821	Iluvatar, I think that the initial responses you got were during a time when there were several people posting who were posting for the first time and now don't frequent this site much. I'd say that the regulars here were all well aware of the issues that you've brought up and were not "shaken" in the faith. I don't think you should feel guilty for stating what you are feeling as long as it's truly what you're feeling. I think that maybe some felt that you were trolling, but I don't believe that was the case.